Pentagon Doctor: No More Emergency Blood!

When an American soldier is wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan and starts to bleed out, there’s not always time to screen replacement blood for diseases the way you would back in the States. When several soldiers are hit at the same time — a so-called "mass casualty event" — unhurt soldiers will just line up, arms extended, ready to donate their own blood to save their comrades.

Incidents like these are covered by an "emergency protocol," meaning the blood is "not approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the purpose of treating life-threatening injuries" because it hasn’t been screened for all potential pathogens, Inside Defense reports (subscriptions required). There have been some 6,000 blood protocol waivers in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2007, according to a June report from the Defense Health Board.

But at least one doctor wants to end the practice. "The untested issue is what the Defense Health Board doesn’t like," board member David Walker, from University of Texas, said. "We want the soldiers to receive the same care that would be approved by the FDA in the United States."

Anticipating a major backlash (after all, this is inured troops’ lives we’re talking about), Walker emphasized that he believes fresh blood is no better than "Packed Red Blood Cells" shipped from the States and stored near the combat zone.

He said some combat surgeons hold an "almost religious belief" that so-called fresh whole blood, or FWB, is better suited to treat the often horrific injuries of battle in Iraq and Afghanistan … "At this point, there is not strong evidence to believe that fresh whole blood gives a better outcome," Walker said.

One thing’s for sure: no one is going to take chances with wounded soldiers’ lives. The controversy is over exactly what entails risk.